> Gesendet: Dienstag, 19. August 2014 um 12:53 Uhr > Von: "Martin Cermak" <marti...@gmail.com> > An: "Michael Treibton" <mtreib...@googlemail.com> > Cc: fvwm <fvwm@fvwm.org> > Betreff: Re: FVWM: fvwm - porting patches from mvwm > > On Tue 2014-08-19 10:09 , Michael Treibton wrote: > > But then why can't this be done ontop of fvwm2 in CVS? i don't really > > like the fork and it does seem difficult to understand the > > relationship of mvwm to fvwm at the moment. as a user which one do i > > use? > > > > Michael > > FVWM is unique. I'd love it to survive. Forking and "doing things > right" might be a catharsis for an individual but not necessarily > a real benefit for our VM from both the user- and developer > community pow. > > Martin > >
As far as I understood, MVWM was created to do risky things, understand the code, "romp around" and experiment with new designs. If you ask me, it is NOT MY interest to let the results of this kind of work flow into a stable window manager until the programmers are 100% sure that their work does not make the existing window manager worse than better. I think, it is a good idea to create a new project, where risky actions can be done as long as the development team ports the safe and approved improvments back to the original. My impression is that this was admittedly written in earlier messages, but apparently not obvious enough (for those people who skip every second line when reading e-mail messages) :-) just my two cents - Michael -
